Glenn Beck lifts 'caliphate' to the top of Google Trends with conspiracy theory

[FrankRep]

Researching the Caliphate and the Muslim Brotherhood (and similar organizations) makes me an Islamophobe? That's ridiculous.

No, being an Islamophobe makes you an Islamophobe.

Glad I could clear that up.

That's just childish name calling.

 

[libertarian4321]

That's just childish name calling.

I didn't call you anything in the previous post, I was just helping to answer your question.

However, since you seem to want to know my opinion, I think you are a first rate Islamophobe and a fear monger.

See, when asked, I came out and told the truth.

Too bad you don't have the stones to do the same.

I hate to use the words of a man like Clayton Bigsby, but they seem appropriate here: If you've got hate in your heart, let it out. There's no reason to hide behind the rather thin veneer of simply trying to create a discussion or doing "research."

 

[BlackTerrel]

While I'm sure this is the goal of some people the idea that they would ever have the means to do such a thing is lunacy.

I don't think Beck is some overly evil guy who spends all his time trying to figure out how to mess with Ron Paul - as some people do. I however do not believe he is the brightest guy in the world

 

[BlackTerrel]

I have yet to meet a former Muslim who didn't hate Muslims or hate his own culture. Someone who hates his own identity clearly has severe mental problems. By the way, I've seen the same from Christians who convert to Islam, they become quite hateful as well.

Every single Muslim does, and those who don't are clearly ignorant about the the teachings of Islam.

Clearly. So who else believes converting to Christianity from Islam deserves death? I have a feeling we have other RPF members who agree with you.

The fact that no one calls you out but Frank is chided for being an "Islamophobe" is telling. There's a stark anti-Christian bias by a lot of people here. And it's no better than Beck's caliphate remarks.

 

[MichelleHeart]

I didn't call you anything in the previous post, I was just helping to answer your question.

However, since you seem to want to know my opinion, I think you are a first rate Islamophobe and a fear monger.

See, when asked, I came out and told the truth.

Too bad you don't have the stones to do the same.

I hate to use the words of a man like Clayton Bigsby, but they seem appropriate here: If you've got hate in your heart, let it out. There's no reason to hide behind the rather thin veneer of simply trying to create a discussion or doing "research."

Criticizing a religion because you have fundamental theological differences with its system of beliefs is the equivalent of spreading hatred and bigotry? Criticizing radical factions of the faith who support world domination and a totalitarian super-state makes one an "Islamophobe?" Look, I dated a Muslim once. So I have nothing against them. But FrankRep isn't spreading hatred, nor is he advocating the bombing and slaughtering of innocents, nor is he advocating foreign interventionism, indefinite occupation, permanent military bases, perpetual warfare, nation-building, or the forced imposition of Western values through military belligerence or force of arms. All he is saying is that those who applaud the revolution in Egypt are wrongheaded and misguided, considering that these people – the Islamic extremists, the communists, the socialist front groups – are against everything we stand for. From an article FrankRep posted not too long ago, in case you don't take the consideration to read anything he posts without throwing vitriolic insults at him and resorting to childish, second-grade name-calling:

The Global Socialist Left and Egypt
In an article posted by World Socialist Web Site – a subsidiary of the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) – they reveal the purpose of the Egyptian revolution as follows:

The aim must be to replace the existing state with a workers’ government, controlled by new institutions of popular democracy. Such a government will be the basis for carrying through socialist measures, including the nationalization of all major corporations and banks.​

They also called for the following:

• For a living minimum wage, guaranteed jobs, a massive programme of house building, education and health
  
• For the nationalisation of Egypt's big corporations, the banks and large estates and their democratic planning to meet the needs of the masses not an elite
  
• For a socialist Egypt and a socialist confederation of the region, on an equal and voluntary basis

Is it really "anti-liberty" to see something wrong with this picture? Hm? Is this what libertarians support?

Libertarian Wayne Allen Root doesn't buy it:

The media has done it again. As usual, they’ve presented the wrong message to the American people about the Egyptian crisis and it’s not just because of the liberal bias of the U.S. media. It’s also because both the left and right have only one agenda: Sensationalizing the story to raise ratings. Their interest is creating the story that sells best, facts come second.

The media has chosen to sell the storyline told by the rioters and anarchists in the streets. They have chosen to interview only one side, those participating in these protests. But is that representative of the true storyline? Is there another side to the story? Of course there is.

I just got off the phone with a longtime friend – a successful Egyptian business leader. He believes that several hundred thousand people in the streets do not represent the 80 million citizens of Egypt. They represent anarchists, communists, and Islamic extremists – all with an agenda and axe to grind. He says if you polled the people of Egypt today, the majority would support Mubarak. He says that the backbone of Egypt – the business owners, small business community, and middle class still support Mubarak and the military. They are horrified by the mobs in the street and are shocked at Obama’s tepid response to the riots and the one-sided portrayal of the situation by the U.S. media.

My friend asked a simple, but powerful question. “If several hundred thousand people rioted on the streets of New York and demanded Obama be removed, would that represent all of America’s three hundred million citizens? Would the media report this meant the end of the Obama regime?”

Good question. If the Million Man march or the Restore Honor Gathering rather than being peaceful had decided to riot and firebomb the U.S. capital, would the media paint a sympathetic portrait? Would we cave to the demands of a relatively small number of rioters versus three hundred million citizens? I think not.

Has the media bothered to interview anyone on the other side of this Egyptian crisis? Has anyone gone out of their way to interview the shop owners or homeowners not rioting in the streets and ask them if they would rather be represented by Mubarak and the military or allow anarchy and mob rule to determine their leaders?

My friend explained that if the Muslim Brotherhood take over, he, his family, and virtually the entire business community will be forced to leave the country they love. If Egypt becomes a Muslim extremist country, tourism, the #1 business of Egypt, will be extinguished. Egypt’s economy will be destroyed and those who think they are bad off now will experience true poverty and starvation.​

"Islamophobe, Islamophobe, Islamophobe!"

 

[Philmanoman]

So what do we do...cut off aid...or triple it?

 

[squarepusher]

Muslim Brotherhood approves

 

[Yieu]

Clearly. So who else believes converting to Christianity from Islam deserves death? I have a feeling we have other RPF members who agree with you.

The fact that no one calls you out but Frank is chided for being an "Islamophobe" is telling. There's a stark anti-Christian bias by a lot of people here. And it's no better than Beck's caliphate remarks.

I think you are seeing something that is simply not there. I agree that there is some anti-Christian bias, but I believe it only comes from the small atheist minority here, and not all atheists here are radical to actually be actively anti-Christian, I am sure there are plenty atheists here who respect others for their religion and their right to have whatever religion they desire, so long as it is not pushed onto them.

Some of the posters in this thread that have been fed up with the kind of bigotry that Glen Beck and FrankRep promote are even Christians.

So to say there is a "stark anti-Christian bias" by "a lot of people here" -- not only do I believe that is an exaggeration, but in those words it is simply not true. I do find it odd that some Christians say that Christians are the most persecuted, when I have been persecuted by Christians for my religion...

Now, on the other hand, I do think among the Christians on the board here, there might be a radical fringe among them that would be so radical and fringe so as to tell me that I will go to hell, and am barred from entry into Heaven due to simply choosing another method of worshiping the same God. That is religious persecution, and is a stark anti-Hindu bias, as well as being intolerant of ones brother under God.

As for myself, I readily welcome Christians with open arms, and accept them as brothers and sisters under the same God. There is no reason for us to consider ourselves divided in any manner. Our goal is the same -- to worship, serve, and love God -- the one and only God there is. There is nothing more uniting than that! It is a bond of love, between religions and among the religious.

Criticizing a religion because you have fundamental theological differences with its system of beliefs is the equivalent of spreading hatred and bigotry?

The way you worded this question, I would answer that it could be, sometimes, but it depends on the criticism. Criticizing only a religion is not always clear cut hatred and bigotry, it is possible for it to not be hateful or bigoted in many cases.

However, criticizing a person based on their religion is always hateful and bigoted. For example, if you were to tell me that I am going to hell because I am not Christian, or that I am unable to reach heaven -- I consider that to be hateful and bigoted, and to say that is to personally insult me, if you were to tell me that, or even to think that about me. In fact, it would be aggressive religious persecution if you were to tell me that.

Criticizing radical factions of the faith who support world domination and a totalitarian super-state makes one an "Islamophobe?"

I am not so sure that FrankRep is only criticizing the radical factions. At least the way he comes off is criticizing the entirety of Islam, all factions of it.

Please note that the same views he is flooding our forum with are the same that Neocons use as fear mongering propaganda to spread wars in the Middle East. We already know where his arguments lead. Regardless of whether he personally believes in non-interventionism, the arguments he is using do lead to interventionism and war, and they are Neocon arguments.

Such arguments as his do not promote liberty, they promote war, and an unjust war is not very religious. And it is deceptive to call the posts he makes here "research" into something, because it is very clear that his mind is already made up -- he is not researching, then. There is another word for what he is doing, and it is called spreading propaganda; propaganda that has been used to lead to wars. That is not name calling, that's correctly identifying the type of argument.

 

[ExPatPaki]

So who else believes converting to Christianity from Islam deserves death?

All Muslims do. It's part of Islamic law. If you disagree with Islamic law, you're not really a Muslim. Anything else? Not going to sugar coat Islam here for you.

The fact that no one calls you out but Frank is chided for being an "Islamophobe" is telling.

Oh please. People like Frank take the term "islamaphobe" as a compliment, not an insult.

 

[ExPatPaki]

I could be wrong , but I think the Quran states that apostates will be punished by God . I think the other penalties are derived by men ?

It does state that, but all Islamic schools of jurisprudence are in agreement that death is the punishment of an apostate.

 

[moostraks]

Clearly. So who else believes converting to Christianity from Islam deserves death? I have a feeling we have other RPF members who agree with you.

The fact that no one calls you out but Frank is chided for being an "Islamophobe" is telling. There's a stark anti-Christian bias by a lot of people here. And it's no better than Beck's caliphate remarks.

Good morning BT! Since I was busy yesterday I did not get a chance to revisit this thread till this morning so nothing telling there about my non-response. FWIW I believe in the teachings of Jesus. This article is media sensationalism to inspire those who believe you can follow Jesus and participate in a preemptive war.

Instead of feeling persecuted while living within the safe confines of the US which is not under military siege by an outside force take a few moments to understand what the people who are being obliterated with their bodies and those of their loved ones shredded into kingdom come live with daily. We aren't setting up charity-esque fronts to push our agenda and we well exceeded the number of innocents murdered by so-called terrorists. What would you do if you were in their position? How much anger and how much more would you be willing to sacrifice just because someone took away your right to your religion and culture at the boot of a military heel??? Violence begets violence.

It is one thing to feel your salvation is assured because of your belief in Jesus. It is another to feel the right to destroy a people because their religious views do not agree with yours. This article is directing hate at all people of a specific religious persuasion. As I see it this individual in the article is overlooking the fact that we are doing everything he accuses Muslims of conspiring to achieve but as a nation waging a war to promote western values. As a foreigner, I would view the US as a nation that will not be stopped until it has a military base in every nation spreading its fear, hatred, and intolerance of those who are different. I feel this as a citizen who has been harassed because my religious views as a christian are different from those who are your average Joe Sunday attendee...

 

[Yieu]

All Muslims do. It's part of Islamic law. If you disagree with Islamic law, you're not really a Muslim. Anything else? Not going to sugar coat Islam here for you.

Hmm, well, I do believe that someone born to a family that is religious is not bound to the religion of his father and mother. I was born into a Christian family, and I am now Hindu. I have become more peaceful due to conversion, so not all converts become so terrible.

So that is not a rule that I could be convinced to comply with, as I believe everyone must find their own religion for themselves, so a child cannot be considered an adherent of any particular religion until he is old enough to reason and voluntarily takes to that religion, of his own mind.

Your argument would have slightly more basis if it took this information into account, but I do not think that it does. But then, a major part of my religion is ahimsa, or non-violence, and this non-violence (the same as the Non-Aggression Principle) applies to all aspects of life down to what we eat.

Oh please. People like Frank take the term "islamaphobe" as a compliment, not an insult.

You may be right about that, the level of neocon-style propaganda he adheres to is proof of this.

 

[ExPatPaki]

Hmm, well, I do believe that someone born to a family that is religious is not bound to the religion of his father and mother. I was born into a Christian family, and I am now Hindu. I have become more peaceful due to conversion, so not all converts become so terrible.

Cool. My previous boss was a Jewish woman who converted and became Sikh. I made that prior comment based on people I've met in college and some Pakistanis who I met in Rome and London. The Pakistanis converted to Christianity in order to get asylum refugee status in Italy. They didn't seem very "Christian like" and it came apparent they didn't convert out of some love for Jesus, but to get out of Pakistan. (That's understandable too, Pakistan isn't the best place to live these days). But they really have this hatred for all things Muslim, blind support for Israel, and support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of Christian crusade. Really stuff that's out there. I don't know if they were maybe trying to impress their new Christian friends. I found a few similar people in college, though they weren't as bad as the ones in England and Italy. One was a friend of my brother's, who punched his 70 year old father in the face, because of an argument that they were having. My brother asked him later why did he do that, and he said it was because his father was making him doubt his faith in Christ. He said his father was giving him a hard time for converting from Islam, and his Christian buddies told him that he should show his father who is stronger physically.

On the other side of the spectrum, I also met a few former Christians who had converted to Islam in college. They were quite hateful towards Christians and even towards other Muslims who they didn't think were morally upright. Especially towards Muslim women who didn't cover up.

 

[moostraks]

It does state that, but all Islamic schools of jurisprudence are in agreement that death is the punishment of an apostate.

There is a group of radical christians who believe they are doing their god's will by going into foreign nations and seeking those who live by a different religious viewpoint and killing them until their nation submits. They feel they can find justification within the Old and New Testament.

 

[moostraks]

Hmm, well, I do believe that someone born to a family that is religious is not bound to the religion of his father and mother. I was born into a Christian family, and I am now Hindu. I have become more peaceful due to conversion, so not all converts become so terrible.

I had to step away and see other religions before I could appreciate being Christian as my calling.It is the framework which helps me grasp the divine most clearly but to demand all understand as I do seems to deny the ability of supernatural understanding to exist outside of only that which I may grasp. Ironically many will claim I am not a Christian because I am not like most mainstream expectations.

 

[Yieu]

I had to step away and see other religions before I could appreciate being Christian as my calling.It is the framework which helps me grasp the divine most clearly but to demand all understand as I do seems to deny the ability of supernatural understanding to exist outside of only that which I may grasp. Ironically many will claim I am not a Christian because I am not like most mainstream expectations.

That is great. Everyone should take to the faith that brings them personally closer to loving and serving God, be it Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, or whatever faith that they feel is the method they prefer to use to worship God. Everyone's relationship with God is a personal relationship. Telling everyone that is not your particular sect within a religion must be held to an Ultimatum that if they do not agree to means that 100% they are going to hell, regardless of the degree of their great desire to love and serve God, does not sound like something a merciful God would do. A merciful God would leave many paths through which He can be known, because He wants all of his children to return to him.

 

[oyarde]

It does state that, but all Islamic schools of jurisprudence are in agreement that death is the punishment of an apostate.

That is what I thought . What if they just went with what the book says instead ? That would be better ...

 

[Yieu]

All Muslims do. It's part of Islamic law. If you disagree with Islamic law, you're not really a Muslim. Anything else? Not going to sugar coat Islam here for you.

It does state that, but all Islamic schools of jurisprudence are in agreement that death is the punishment of an apostate.

These two comments appear to disagree with each other... It is not in the scripture, so it is not Islamic law, that would make it man's law. For it to be religious law, it MUST be in the scriptures.

That is what I thought . What if they just went with what the book says instead ? That would be better ...

Indeed. That fact right there makes killing apostates indefensible, because if it is not in scripture, then it is not religious law.

I try to follow my religion's laws and commandments, and I think it would be a good idea for others to try (at least try) to follow their religion's laws and commandments. But once you start just making stuff up... then it is not a religious law, but a cultural idea, a law of man, but it can never be a religious law.

The term "Islamic law" implies that the laws all come from the religion, which means they can be referenced by scripture. I think in most of our religions, it is noted that God has set into nature that all actions will be either punished or rewarded, in this life or the next (depending on what you believe "the next" means).

So it really is not necessary for man to write into the laws of men all manner of punishments for misdeeds. God will make everyone's judgments, in the end. There is no need for all the trying to "play God" with the legislature in that way.

 

[ExPatPaki]

I've done plenty of research on this subject, and when I started I wanted to prove that Islam does not proscribe death as a punishment for apostasy. But the arguments for the death penalty are quite stronger than the ones not for it. And yes, they do mention that the Quran does not proscribe any sort of punishment.

Islamic law and other religious practice do not just come from the Quran, they also comes from the Hadith. The hadith for example tells Muslims how to pray, the Quran doesn't. There are many examples from history that the leaders after Mohammad, the so-called "Rightly Guided Caliphs" did put apostates to death. Not sure if Mohammad himself did, I am reading that he did, but I cannot verify a historical source for it.

 

[pcosmar]

For those that ascribe to this irrational fear,,
How exactly would a 'caliphate' work under our Constitution?

It wouldn't and couldn't.
Restore The Constitution.
End of discussion.